MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA December 17, 2013 I. Call to Order II. Reading of the Minutes of November 12, 2013 Ill. General Repor1t A. Correspondence B. Financial Tr
ansactions C. Newspaper Articles D. Recruitmer1t Update 1. P1-incipals' Recruitment Reports 2. MRC Office Recruitment Report E. LRSD Origi,nal Magnet Schools Personnel -Vacancies and New Hires IV. Business and/or Action Items A. Discussion of Tentative Desegregation Agreement B. Discussio1n of Magnet Schools Evaluation Report C. Set Next Meeting Date V. Adjournme:nt rameagsr ee9 112 areasin sch<X>l-suit Desegregation~case mediator sought JEANNIE ROBERTS ARKANSAS DEf,!OCRAT-GAZETTE Differences in the settlement of a 31-year-old federal school desegregation lawsuit will require the intervention of a federal magistrate to resolve, attorneys for the Pulaski County Special School District and the Joshua intervenors said Monday in a U.S. District Court filing. The joint request asked that U.S. District Judge D. Price Marshall Jr. assign a portion of the case for federal mediation, saying that they were able to "reach tentative agreements, but have some disputes" that remain. The settlement of the 1989 Pulaski County desegregation case was negotiated last month by attorneys for the state
the Little Rock, North Little Rock and Pulaski County Special school districts
the Joshua intervenors
and the class of all employees in the three school districts known as the Knight intervenors. In the preliminary settlement, attorneys for the Pulaski County Special district See UNITARPYag, e 6A Unitary the communities in the Pulaski legal fees, and $500,000 to the More County Special School District Joshua intervenors and $75,0,00 to pursue a separate, commu- to.the Knight intervenors for Continuedf romP age 1A informationni ty-based school district." legal fees. and the Joshua intervenors on the Web On Monday night, the Sher~ Marshall has given his pre-were charged with resolving wood City council passed a lirninary stamp of approval on their differences in how the Desegregation resolution to submifa written the settlement, but a final rul-district would achieve unitary arkansasonline.com/desegdocs. objection to the federal court ing will not be made until after status in nine key areas. The about the proposed settlement a Jan. 13-14" fairnessh earing." .E.ittle Rock and North Little solved.'He added that he had preventing n~w school dis- In-November, Marshall reRock districts have already not been "hopeful that we got tricts other than Jacksonville. quired that the parties to the been declared unitary, or de- any more than we.got." . Earlier, Walker said the case publicize the terms of segregated. Roberts said he would have three biggest roadblocks to the agreement and to publicly Marshall initially issued "loved to have had another one achieving unitary status are notify individual members of a Dec. 2 deadline to Pulaski resolyed, but .we were ruhning facilities, student achievement the Joshua class or their atCounty Special and the Josh out of time." and discipline. He declined, torneys that they are entitled ua intervenors to either work Walker is confident, how- however, to go into detail to address the judge M'ith evout their differences amongst ever, that future negotiations about what it would take to idence and objections about themselves or to refer the will.bear more fruit. reach an agreement. ' , the proposed agreement at the matter to a federal magistrate. , "These are difficult issues, Roberts said in a previous January hearing. . That deadline was extended to and they take time to address. interview that there was sim- So far two l.etters have' Monday after both sides said We have a new administration ply t9o much to do in too little been received from individu they felt they could resolve now..The other administrators time to equalize the condition als opposing the settlement.., more issues if given extra time. are gone, and their resolve of the district's decaying facil- One was from parent Stefanie In May 2011, U.S. District was sometim.es conflicting," ities. Moore, who said the proposed Judge Brian S. Miller ruled that he said. ' ' " . , He was more hopeful.o n a agreement'.sl imits on interdis-the district was not desegre Walker said the current .quick resolution of the overall trict student transfers into Lit-, gated in the areas of student Pulaski Cqunty Special'superc agreement after Monday's fiP tle R,ock's six magnet schools: assignment
advanced place- intendent, Jerry-Guess, has ing, however. :. would hamper educational qpment and gifted education recognized that t-he school '"If eel like we're very close, portunities for children who programs
student discipline
district has riot made sufficient if not already there. They are live in.the Pulaski County Spe- school facilities
scholarships
progress and is determined to probably in the'shape .that !hey' cial district'. ' special education
staffillg
s tu- achieve unitary status in all could be 'handed back to the The other, Rizelle Aaron dent achievement
and deseg- areas on a more satisfactory judge pretty_ quickly," Roberts of Jacksonville, questioned regation monitoring. timeline. said, "I think there~ _contin- the Jacksonville:c orrim.unity's' Pulaski County Special at- "1 believe that he will do ue to be good-cooper~tion.M y financial, abilityt o support its torney Allen Roberts said re what 'lie says, He is the first th~ughts ar_eth at we ve got to , own school district. cently that he was confident one to make that specific of a :"mt to see~we do g_et_ma ~g- Objections must first be the parties could agree on at commitment in several years," iStiate appo1
IltedT. hen _wev e submitted in writing to the least fiv_eo f the issues befiore Walker said. got to get Wl th the,magiStiate federal court b xi M d to see how.he wants us to pro-' Membe f thyn. Je h onl ay. . the second cutoff date. Walker pointed out that-a ceed,, . . rs o e os ua.c ass Monday's court filing, how- former Pulaski County Spe- R~ berts added that he who_~ave questions about the ever, reported that only two cial deputy superintendent, thinks a magistrate.would la~slllt, the s_ettlemenot ~ t~e areas - student assignment, Linda Remele, is now leading send the two partiesback to faun~ss h~arill~ _can put theu and advanced placement and an effort opposing a portion the drawing board for more questions ill wntillg to WaJer, honors programs -were able of the settlement that bars any negotiations, then ask that the lawyer f9r the Jos~ua ill to be resolved. The court doc new school districts in Pulas- they report back to him for a tervenors, Hi~ address 1s 1723 ument asked that the district ki County other than a new progress update. Broadway,_L ittle Rock, Ark. be rele.ased from federal over- Jacksonville school district. Under the proposed settle- 72206, or Johnwalkeratty@ sight on these two measures Remele and other members ment agreement involving all aol.com. . , . with the exception that it con of the Shetwood J?ublic Edu7 three districts, the state would. Members of:the Knigh~ illtinue "generali mplementation cation Foundation formed ear- pay a total of $65.8 million a , terven_orcs an direct questions of these areas" until the court lier this year to push for Sher- year through the end of the to therr attorneys, Mark Burenters an order with respect wood's own school district. 2017-18s choql year in desegc net~e or C~aytonB )ackstock, to the remaining obligations. The group held a news con- regation aid, In the fillal year, 1010 W. Third St., Little Rock, John Walker, the attorney ference last week, saying that the money can be used qnly A~k. 72201, or mburnette@ representing black students in its, members do not want to for construction and renova- m1tchellblacks_t?ck.com or Pulaski County's three school derail the desegregation set- tion of academic facilities: cblackstock@ rrutchellblack-districts who are known as the tlement but wanted to.express The agreement also calls stockcom. Joshua intervenors, said Mon- "our surprise, and our extreme for the state to pay $250,000 Informationf or this article was day that he wasn't surprised disappointment and dismay, to each of the three districts contribvted by Jake Sandlin of . that only two issues were re over the unequal treatment of to reimbu r, se them for their the ArkansasD emocrat-GazeI. t te DRAFT MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES November 12, 2013 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Magnet Review Committee was held in the Magnet Review Committee Office, 1920 North Main Street, Suite 101, North Little Rock, Arkansas on Tuesday, November 12, 2013. Members Present: Dr. Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson - LRSD Terri Rogers, PCSSD-Alternate for Dr. Robert Clowers Danny Reed, ADE Members Absent: Dr. Robert Clowers, PCSSD Oliver Dillingham, ADE Joy Springer, Joshua lntervenors Micheal Stone, NLRSD Guest: Margie Powell, ODM The meeting was called to order at 8:35 a.m. by Chairperson Dr. Sadie Mitchell. She noted that a quorum was present since Danny Reed had the proxy vote of Oliver Dillingham, ADE representative. Dr. Mitchell called for a reading of the minutes of the meeting of October 8, 2013. Danny Reed made a motion to accept the minutes as presented, and Terri Rogers seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Mitchell then called for a reading of the minutes of the Special-Called Meeting of October 16, 2013. Danny Reed made a motion to accept the minutes as presented, and Terri Rogers seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Several e-mails were presented to MRC members. Dr. Mitchell provided a brief recap of the e-mails and noted that several had to do with parents inquiring about enrollment and the MRC Office's response. Another e-mail was from Parkview thanking the MRC Office for assistance in obtaining mailing labels from NLRSD and PCSSDto notify parents of their recruitment night. No action was required by the MRC. Dr. Mitchell informed MRC members that LRSD is considering a STEM Academy and, on November 20, 2013, LRSD is going on a virtual tour of a Hartford, Connecticut school to follow as a model for STEM. She wanted to let MRC members know of the coincidence with Magnet Schools of America's national conference being held in Hartford in 2014. Bills in the amount of $2,518.95 were presented for payment. Danny Reed made a motion to pay the bills, and Terri Rogers seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. An e-mail was received from Hogan-Lovells, transmitting a memorandum entitled, "Department of Justice and Department of Education Office for Civil Rights guidance on Fisher vs. University of Texas at Austin." Copies were given to MRC members for their information, but no action was required. With regard to a recruitment report, a copy of the October 1, 2013 Enrollment Report for all Little Rock School District schools was given to MRC members for their review. No action was required at this time. Margie Powell, from ODM, reported that they have started on their enrollment report, and she will provide the MRC Office with a copy as soon as possible. Updated recruitment reports from Stipulation magnet school principals were given to MRC members. Dr. Mitchell provided a brief recap of some of the activities of the schools. She noted, in particular, the participation of schools at -2- fJRAFT the Building Communities, not Bullies Rally and informed MRC members that the magnet schools were very well represented. A recruitment report, prepared by the MRC Office, listed all the activities that have been accomplished so far with advertising already established, as well as what is planned. Plans are underway for Magnet Fair on Saturday, January 25, 2014, prior to Early Enrollment which begins on Monday, January 27, 2014. With regard to Personnel Vacancies and New Hires, Dr. Mitchell said there were none to report at this time. Moving on to Business and/or Action Items, a discussion was held with regard to the Executive Director position. Dr. Mitchell reported that, during a SpecialCalled Meeting held on October 16, 2013, the MRC voted to accept the Interview Team's recommendation, and offered the job to one of the candidates who had applied and came before the Interview Team. However, that candidate did not accept the position because of the salary that was offered. No further discussion was held with regard to the position. Dr. Mitchell reported that the Evaluation Report will remain on the agenda for discussion. It was agreed by consensus that the next MRC meeting will be held on December 10, 2013, in the MRC Office. Dr. Mitchell asked if there were any special requests for the December 10th agenda. Upon hearing none, Danny Reed made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and Terri Rogers seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 a.m. -3- DRAFT MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE BILLS TO BE PAID December 17, 2013 1. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 985.00 (Advertising in "Where We Live") 2. Compsys 48.33 (Monthly Billing to Act as MRC's Website Host and E-Mail Access) 3. Magnet Schools of America 250.00 (MRC's Membership Dues for 2013-14) 4. Capital Business Machines 78.12 (Monthly Billing for MRC's Copier Maintenance Contract) 5. Central Arkansas Newspapers 225.00 (Advertising in "Back to School" Issue in Jacksonville Patriot, Maumelle Monitor, NLR Times and Sherwood Voice) 6. American Home Life 825.00 (MRC's Office Rent for December, 2013) 7. American Home Life 182.50 (MRC's Communications Expense for November, 2013) 8. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 60.00 (Subscription Renewal for Three Months} 9. Kid's Directory 335.00 (Advertising in December, 2013} 10. Staples Advantage 122.65 (Supplies for the MRC Office} TOTAL BILLS TO BE PAID $3,111.60 Rx Date/Time DEC-16-2013(MO08N:2) 4 P.0 02 DEC/!6/2013/lM0:O26NA M FAXN o. P.0 02 Case: 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document#: 4958-0 Date Filed: 12/13/2013 Page 1 of 1 FILED U.S. DISTRICTC OURT EASTERND ISTRICTA RKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DEC 13 2013 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JAMES W. McCOR By:___::.'-!.-~~~--
:
Dc'cEP-
::CiE'LER~K LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al. v. No. 4:82-cv-866-DPM NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. ORDER PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS The Court has received the attached budgets from the Magnet Review Committee: the actual expenditures for 2012-2013 and the proposed expenditures for 2013-2014. The Court notes that the proposed budget for this school year is consistent timing-wise with the parties' pending proposed settlement-magnet funding is to be maintained without change through30 June 2014. Any objections to these budgets are due by 20 December 2013. So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jf." United States District Judge I 3 IJ.u~ -
.&I i Magnet Review From: Sent: To: Subject: CLOWERS ROBERT L. [RCLOWERS@pcssd.org] Wednesday, December 11, 2013 12:01 PM Magnet Review FW: Dem-Gaz re: M to M transfers Pulaski County school-transfer rules up in air Desegregation deal seen forcing redo on 3 districts By Cynthia Howell This article was published December 9, 2013 at 2:10 a.m. The tentatively approved settlement in the Pulaski County school desegregation lawsuit does more than phase out state desegregation money - it will change all the rules for the longtime interdistrict student-transfer programs in the three districts, including the Little Rock magnet schools. The proposed settlement was negotiated by attorneys for the state, districts and intervening parties. It was tentatively approved by U.S. District Judge D. Price Marshall Jr. on Nov. 22. The agreement that would end $65.8 million a year in desegregation aid in 2018 is scheduled to be the subject of a Jan. 13-14 fairness hearing before the judge makes any decision on its final approval. The tentative settlement states that no new student applications will be accepted for either the six magnet schools or for the majority-to-minority interdistrict student-transfer program that enables students to transfer from a district in which their race is in the majority to a district and school where their race is in the minority. Currently enrolled students in the magnet schools may remain in them until they complete all grades, according to the tentative settlement. Current students in the majority-to-minority transfer program may remain in the district in which they now attend school until high school graduation. A relatively small number of students who are not now in magnet schools or the transfer program would still be able to transfer across district lines to attend school - but they would have to exercise a "legal transfer" process that is authorized in state law but has not been used much in Pulaski County in recent years. Stephen Jones, an attorney for the North Little Rock School District, said the caps on the number of interdistrict student transfers to magnet and other schools are the product of compromise. The North Little Rock district wanted to "keep the doors open" for transfer students, Jones said. But the Pulaski County Special district, which is trying to remove itself from the state's fiscal distress program and raise money to build new schools, wanted to restrict transfers out of that district as a way to stabilize its enrollment, he said. "This is just a middle ground that we were able to negotiate that accommodated our interests and at the same time accommodated the Pulaski County Special School District's interest in limiting their exposure to student loss," Jones said. The tentatively approved agreement would permit up to 30 students to transfer from the Pulaski County Special district to the Little Rock School District each year to attend magnet schools or other schools. Pulaski County Special also would approve up to 30 students to transfer each year to the North Little Rock district. In some years, more than 30 students could transfer to accommodate students with siblings, but no more than 150 students can transfer to each district over five years. Pulaski County Special could, but would not be required to, accept transfer students from Little Rock and North Little Rock. Additionally, the Little Rock and North Little Rock districts would allow transfers to each other's districts - 30 each per year, with some flexibility to allow siblings to transfer together. But again, no more than 150 student transfers would be allowed per district over five years. All those transfers would be done using the "legal transfer"process permitted by Arkansas Code Annotated 3- 18-316. Legal transfer students have to be approved by the school board of the sending district and the school board of the receiving district. The state aid for a legal transfer student follows the student to the receiving district. Local tax revenue does not follow the student to the receiving district, however. And legal transfer students would have to provide their own transportation to school unless the districts choose to provide it. Jones said the North Little Rock district wanted assurances of at least 50 students from the Pulaski County Special district, but the county district's position was "If we don't take any of your students and send you 30, then that gets you a net of 50. "That's how we got to that number," Jones said. "It's just a negotiated number. If it was up to North Little Rock, we would have open choice and the kids could go to whatever district they wanted to," he said. Jones said the Pulaski County Special district's position heavily weighed upon the potential for Pulaski County Special students to also transfer under the state's revised School Choice Act of 2013 to surrounding districts outside Pulaski County - such as Bryant, Cabot, Sheridan, Mayflower and others. Both the Pulaski County Special and Little Rock districts earlier this year exercised an exemption clause in the School Choice Act because of their involvement in a federal school desegregation lawsuit.As a result, the districts do not send or accept School Choice Act transfer students from districts outside the county. "They are looking at it from an economic point of view," Jones said of the Pulaski County Special district's efforts to retain students and the state funding for those students. The proposed settlement would enable some North Little Rock students to transfer to Little Rock to attend magnet schools. The proposal also allows Little Rock students to transfer to North Little Rock schools, which they have previously not been permitted to do under existing majority-to-minority program. The majority-to-minority student-transfer program and the six special-program magnet schools in the Little Rock district - Booker, Carver, Gibbs and Williams elementaries, Horace Mann Middle School and Parkview High - were established in the late 1980s to promote voluntary racial desegregation in Pulaski County's three school districts. 2 Although the number of students participating in those programs has dropped off in recent years, the programs are considered well-used and successful. In 2012-13, a total of 3,428 students from all three Pulaski County school districts were enrolled in the six magnet schools - 1,072 of them from North Little Rock and Pulaski County Special school districts. Another 1,723 students crossed district lines to attend schools in a Pulaski County district different from the district in which they lived as the result of the majority-to-minority transfer program. Little Rock Superintendent Dexter Suggs said the special-program magnet schools in his district may lose some of their interdistrict features as the result of the proposed settlement. But those schools and their programs in the arts, and math and sciences will be retained, he said. "Our magnet program will continue. We will not lose the integrity of the programs," Suggs said. "We are actually looking to improve the magnet program," he said, adding that he expects possible enhancements to be identified within the month. Suggs, who became the Little Rock superintendent in July, said he wants to keep and promote the magnet schools as a choice option for families. "We want our magnet program population to increase," Suggs said and noted that the schools will be featured in a future marketing campaign to the public. "If they can grow from 15 [percent] to 25 percent at each school, that would be great," he said about enrollment. The academic themes at the schools won't change, Suggs said. Nor will the racial guidelines for the schools. The magnet schools are supposed to have a racial makeup of 50 percent black students and 50 percent white and other races/ ethnicities. The magnet schools will be populated by students from across the district and will not draw from a defined attendance zone, as is practice for other schools in the district. Suggs has scheduled a meeting Tuesday with the principals of the six magnet schools to brainstorm ways to grow and improve the schools. One change he said he will propose is that students who are enrolled in magnet schools and complete the top grade in those schools be given first priority for enrollment at the next level of magnet schools. Pupils who finish at Booker Arts Magnet Elementary School, for example, would have a greater opportunity to continue in the arts program at Horace Mann Arts and Sciences Magnet Middle School and Parkview Arts and Sciences Magnet High. Currently, students in one magnet school have no greater chance of attending the next level of magnet school than any other student who applies for a special program school. Suggs also said he wants to include Dunbar Middle School's gifted and talented program in the magnet program but eliminate other "magnet" labels at schools in the district. Front Section, Pages 1 on 12/09/2013 Print Headline: Pulaski County school-transfer rules up in air 3 Magnet Review From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Good Afternoon, Curtis, Kimberly D.H. [kimberly.curtis@hoganlovells.com] Monday, December 09, 2013 11 :17 AM Curtis, Kimberly D.H. School District Seeks Sup. Ct. Review of Ruling that Middle School Students Generally Have Constitutional Rights to Use Ambiguously Lewd Speech to Express Political/Social Commentary at Schools DOC044.PDF The attached document is being sent on behalf of John Borkowski and Joel Buckman. Please direct any responses to Mr. Borkowski at john.borkowski@hoganlovells.com and Mr. Buckman at joel.buckman@hoganlovells.com. Thank you, Kimberly Curtis Assistant to John Borkowski, Partner Hogan Lovells US LLP About Hogan Lovells Hogan Lovells is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP. For more information, see www.hoganlovells.com. CONFIDENTIALITY. This email and any attachments are confidential, except where the email states it can be disclosed
it may also be privileged. If received in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone, but notify the sender by return email and delete this email (and any attachments) from your system. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3426 / Virus Database: 3658/6903 - Release Date: 12/09/13 Hogan Lovells To FROM DATE School District Clients and Friends John W. Borkowski Joel D. Buckman December 9, 2013 MEMORANDUM Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, N\N Washington, DC 20004 T +1 202 637 5600 F +1202637 5910 www.hoganlovells.com SUBJECT School District Seeks Supreme Court Review of Ruling that Middle School Students Generally Have Constitutional Right to Use Ambiguously Lewd Speech to Express Political or Social Commentary at School On December 3, 2013, the Easton Area School District in Pennsylvania sought review in the United States Supreme Court of an important appellate court ruling against it. 11 In August, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that the school district violated the First Amendment by prohibiting middle school students from wearing "I ., boobies: (KEEP A BREAST)" bracelets. I/ The Court of Appeals concluded that school districts may categorically punish ambiguously lewd speech-as opposed to plainly lewd speech-only when such speech cannot plausibly be interpreted as political or social commentary. In short, students generally have a constitutional right to use ambiguously lewd speech to express political or social commentary. In the Third Circuit's view, because "I ., boobies: (KEEP A BREAST)" did not rise to the level of plainly lewd speech, and the bracelets were part of a breast cancer awareness campaign, the school district's ban violated the First Amendment. Unless the Supreme Court intervenes, the new test promises practical difficulties for school districts, at least those in Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. I. Legal Background Students do not shed their free speech rights at the school house gate,J/ but they also do not have the same rights as adults on street corners. 1/ Over a series of cases, the Supreme Court has articulated a unique Constitutional framework for evaluating student speech. The cornerstone of that framework is the Court's decision in Tinker. In that landmark case, a school district had punished students for wearing black armbands protesting the Vietnam war. The Supreme Court ruled the district violated the First Amendment. The Court concluded that school 11 http://articles.mcall.com/2013-12-05/news/mc-easton-boobies-bracelets-su preme-cou rt-filing- 20131203 1 _easton-area-school-district-student-speech-brianna-hawk. 'l/ B.H. ex rel. Hawk v. Easton Area Sch. Dist., 725 F.3d 293 (2013) (3d Cir. 2013) (en bane). ~/ Tinker v. Des Moines tndep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969). 1/ See Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393, 406 (2007). Hogan Lovells US LLP is a limi!ed liability partnership registered 1n the Dlstnct of Columbia. Hogan Lovells" is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP, with offices In: Alicante Amsterdam Baltimore Beijing Brussels Caracas Colorado Springs Denver Dubai Ousseldorf Frankfurt Hamburg Hanoi Ho Chi Minh City Hong Kong Houston Johannesburg London Los Angeles Luxembourg Madrid Miami Milan Moscow Munich New York Northern Virginia Paris Philadelphia Prague Rio de Janeiro Rome San Francisco Shanghai Silicon Valley Singapore Tokyo Ulaanbaatar Warsaw Washington DC Associated offices Budapest Jakarta Jeddah Riyadh Zagreb. For more information see www hogan1ove11cso m \\DC 7047261000300- 5275985v 1 School District Clients and Friends - 2 - December 9, 2013 districts may bar student speech protected by the First Amendment only when there is an actual or reasonable forecast of a "substantial disruption" to school activities or "inva[sion] of the rights of others."/ When, as in Tinker,! there is no such disruption, student speech is generally protected. Tinker requires case-by-case analysis. In addition, the Supreme Court has concluded that school districts also may categorically restrict certain categories of speech: School sponsored speech when restrictions relate to legitimate pedagogical concerns. School districts may limit "expressive activities that students, parents, and members of the public might reasonably perceive to bear the imprimatur of the school," such as a school newspaper. Zf Districts may control the "style and content of student speech in schoolsponsored expressive activities so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns."_/ Plainly lewd or vulgar speech. Districts may punish speech a reasonable observer would interpret as lewd, vulgar, or profane speech and conduct, even when it would be protected in other settings. 'd_/ For example, in nominating a peer for class office, a student used an '"elaborate, graphic, and explicit sexual metaphor."' 1Q/ The Supreme Court upheld the student's suspension, concluding the "(d]istrict acted entirely within its permissible authority in imposing sanctions [for the student's] offensively lewd and indecent speech." 111 It also suggested that, at least when the District is not engaging in viewpoint discrimination, the "determination of what manner of speech in the classroom or in school assembly is inappropriate properly rests with the school board." .12_/ School districts may not, however, punish any speech that might be characterized as offensive. jl/ Speech promoting illegal drug use. School districts may prohibit speech that they reasonably interpret as promoting illegal drug use. HI For example, the Supreme Court upheld a principal's suspension of a student for holding up a banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus." .1./ The Third Circuit's decision purports to clarify when school districts may categorically prohibit speech that is ambiguously lewd. _! Tinker, 393 U.S. at 513-14. I Id.
see a/so id. at 517-18 {Black, J., dissenting) (explaining that the armbands did "cause(] comments, warnings by other students, the poking of fun at them, and a warning by an older football player that other, nonprotesting students had better let them alone" and that the armbands "practically 'wrecked"' one math class). ZI Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuh/meier, 484 U.S. 260,271 (1988). _/ Id. at 273. 'd_/ Bethel Sch. Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675, 678, 682-84 (1986). 1.QI Id. at 685-86. 111 Id. 12_/ Id. at 683, 685. 1]/ Morse 551 U.S. at 409. 14/ Id. at 403 . .1..1 Id. IIDC 70<1726/000300 5275985 v1 School District Clients and Friends - 3 - December 9, 2013 II. The Third Circuit's Ruling As part of a breast cancer awareness campaign, three Easton Area School District middle school girls wore bracelets to school proclaiming "I ., boobies: (KEEP A BREAST)." After several months, and despite no actual or impending substantial disruption, administrators demanded the girls take them off or face punishment. Citing the First Amendment two of the three refused. The administrators imposed 1.5 days' in-school suspension and prohibited them from attending a dance
the girls filed a federal law suit. On appeal, the Third Circuit held the district had violated the girls' Constitutional rights. Interpreting the Supreme Court's decisions on vulgar speech and speech promoting illegal drug use, the Court articulated a new rule for ambiguously lewd speech: 1. School districts may categorically restrict "plainly lewd" speech that "offends for the same reasons obscenity offends" regardless of whether it is political or social commentary. 2. School districts may categorically restrict speech not rising to the level of "plainly lewd" but that a "reasonable observer could interpret as lewd" only when the speech cannot "plausibly be interpreted as commenting on a social or political issue.".1/ In applying it, the court will "defer to a school's reasonable judgment that an observer could interpret ambiguous speech as lewd, vulgar, profane, or offensive only if the speech could not plausibly be interpreted as commenting on a political or social issue." 1]_/ According to the Third Circuit, the bracelets presented "an open-and-shut case." .1./ The Court held the bracelets were not lewd but that a reasonable observer could interpret them as lewd. In reaching this determination, the Court undertook a "highly contextual inquiry."~/ It disregarded the speaker's subjective intent and evaluated the "plausibility of the school's interpretation in light of competing meanings
the context, content, and form of the speech
and the age and maturity of the students." 20/ The Court counted as significant that: The bracelets bore "no resemblance to ... 'pervasive sexual innuendo"' plainly offensive to teachers and students (teachers had to request guidance about how to handle the bracelets, administrators waited two months to ban them, and the loudspeaker announcement used the term "boobies")
and "Boobie" was not "remotely akin to the seven words that are considered obscene to minors on broadcast television" and was just a "sophomoric" synonym for breast. 1_/ 1/ Hawk, 725 F.3d at 319-20. 11.J Id. 317. 1.1 Id. at 320. ~I Id. at 309, 320. 201 Id . .fl! Id. at 320. \\DC 7047261000300 - 5275985 v1 School District Clients and Friends - 4 - December 9, 2013 Because the ambiguously lewd bracelets were part of a national breast cancer awareness campaign, they could be interpreted as political or social commentary, and the district, therefore, could not categorically prohibit them. 22/ Ill. Legal and Practical Implications The Third Circuit's new test currently is the law only in Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, and even that could change if the Supreme Court decides to consider the case. It also remains to be seen whether other courts will adopt the Third Circuit's approach. At least one federal district court in Indiana has already upheld the ability of school districts to prohibit the "I ., boobies: (KEEP A BREAST)" bracelets and expressly rejected the Third Circuit's reasoning. 23/ The key practical difficulty for school districts seeking to apply the Third Circuit's decision will be line drawing. The Court's opinion recognized it would require administrators to make difficult judgments: What line demarcates plainly lewd speech from speech that a reasonably observer might interpret as lewd? When is it plausible to think speech is political or social commentary? The Third Circuit's answers to these questions do not provide much clear guidance to school administrators. The majority suggests looking to the Supreme Court's obscenity-to-minors cases and to cases demarcating when speech involves a matter of public concern. 24/ Under this framework, school districts could not bar "I ., boobies: (KEEP A BREAST)" but presumably could bar "I ., titties: (KEEP A BREAST)" (because the latter includes one of the seven dirty words held to be obscene to minors). 25/ The majority offered little guidance on how to respond beyond these two examples. As a dissenting judge pointed out, the lack of a "workable parameter unnecessarily handcuffs school districts." The Third Circuit took comfort that "(o]ver time, the fault lines demarcating plainly lewd speech and political and social speech will settle and become more rule-like as precedent accumulates." 26/ Even if that prediction proves correct, in the meantime, teachers and administrators will face difficult day-to-day decisions. * * * If you have questions about this case or other First Amendment issues, feel free to contact John W. Borkowski at 574-239-7010, john.borkowski@hoganlovells.com or Joel Buckman at 202-637-6408, joel.buckman@hoganlovells.com. 221 Id. 23/ See JA v. Fort Wayne Cmty Sch., No. 12-155 (N.D. Ind. Aug. 20, 2013). 24! Hawk, 725 F.3d at 318-19. 25! Id. at 318
see a/so id. at 339 (Greenaway, Jr., dissenting) (pointing out practical flaws in the majority's approach). 26/ Id.at 319. IIDC - 704726/000300 - 5275985 v1 Recruitment Activities for Gibbs Magnet School of International Studies & Foreign Languages December 5, 2013 1. Publicity in the local news media and LRSD website A. Gibbs has been in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette newspaper three times already this year: (1) AUGUST-First Day of School with Fathers Brin in Students to School ~1 -- Arkansas Democrat-Gazette/MELISSA SUE GERRITS 08/19/13 - Amy Nicholas embraces daughter Avery Nicholas, 7, at Gibbs Magnet Elementary School August 19, 2013 while they wait to hear which classroom Avery will be in for her first year of school at Gibbs. (3) OCTOBER - Gibbs was included in the news article about the One-toOne Laptop Initiative. B. Gibbs has been featured in the Spanish Speakers newspaper, "Hispanic," once so far this year on October 3, with a photo at WorldFest and a mention in the article. (See next page) ~~C:."i:::'..=: .:::.-...., .... _.:_ -.---.-.----.-- --.--.~- ---------- ---..---- IIU na vez mas la ciudad de Lillie U Rock organize el World Fest en el que se festeja la d1vers1dad cultural que hay en la c1ud.111 y en un marco de diversion se exp~nen muestras h1st6ricas y cullurales de_ dv~rsos palses de las cuales son onginano~ diferentes grupos de personas que habtan Arkansas Central. Los representados iban desde las indios amencanos hasta Ghana en Africa y Pakistan entre otras culturas. El evento se realiz6 a un co_stado del Zool6gico de la ciudad y abn6 con un ctesfile de las alumnos de la escu~la Magnet Gibbs de Estudios lntemacionales e ldiomas. quienes portaban banderas de diversos palses y se realizaron las honores a la bandera de Estados Unldos. Esta ocasi6n el juramenlo se realiz6 en Ingles. aleman, trances y en espai\ol, este ultimo dirigido por Neyla Palacios de North Little Rock y estudlante del quinto grado de la escuela Gibbs. Como representante de la cultura hispana estaba Bongo Willie que como ya es tradici6n en el festival, comparti6 sus percusiones con los nii\os y adolescentes que se dieron cita para conocer mtis de la gran diversidad de la que esta formada la ciudad. Por Laura MMlnez de Gut~rrez C. Gibbs has been featured on local television six times this year: (1) AUGUST - Japanese Students and Teacher from Niigata, Japan at Gibbs (2) SEPTEBMER - 9/11 Day of Service and Remembrance with Firefighter Ceremony (3) SEPTEMBER- Ozark Water Project (4) SEPTEMBER 27 -Benefit and Swab Party for Teecumpsy Wiggins (4th grader with leukemia) at Dunbar Community Garden (5) NOVEMBER 8 - "Feel Good Friday" segment on Fox 16 featured Gibbs Annual Breakfast Cereal Drive sponsored by the Mini United Nations. r (6) NOVEMBER 12 - KARK Ch 4 had news story about the Gibbs Annual Breakfast Cereal Drive sponsored by the Mini United Nations. Elementary School Fights Hunger 1 Cereal Box at a Time by Drew Petrimoulx 11/07/2013 LITTLE ROCK, AR -- Every night, many children across the state go to sleep hungry. Some of the kids at Gibbs Elementary are trying to change that in their school. As children at Gibbs stood with cereal boxes in hand, they explained their feelings, knowing some kids at their school don't have enough food. "{It) makes me sad that they don't have enough food and then they need some," Nina Millender said. "It's unfair that we are like eating and eating the night away while others don't even have food at all," Simon Nuckle said. To help make a difference, the children are encouraging their classmates to bring in boxes of cereal, and they're getting help organizing from their international studies teacher Vicki Gonterman. "They think maybe that it's going to go out and feed the hungry in Little Rock somewhere, but what it does is it stays right here in the school community, because we all have hunger very close to us," Gonterman said. Nearly half of the students at Gibbs qualify for free or reduced lunch. The cereal boxes collected go home with those most in need each weekend. "It makes me feel good that we're doing the food drive because we're helping them," Millender said. Their teacher calls it a service-learning project. The kids are serving their peers in need while at the same time learning how close to home the problem of hunger can hit. D. Gibbs has been featured on LRSD website four times, once on Twitter (LRSD) and twice on Facebook (LRSD): (1) Gibbs Educator Selected for Global Conference in NYC Gibbs Educator Participates in Japan Society's Global Conference in NYC In May, Ms. Vicki Stroud Gonterman, International Studies Specialist at Gibbs International Magnet School, received a select invitation to participate in the Third Annual Going Global: International Student Social Networking Conference for Educators organized by the Japan Society. Gonterman, one of only ten US-based educators invited, attended the three day conference, August 7-9 in New York, with educators from Japan and Pakistan. The all-expenses paid conference was sponsored in part by the Japan Foundation Center for Global Partnership and the Toshiba International Foundation. The U.S.Japan Foundation submitted Gonterman's name for inclusion in the conference as she was their 2006 Elgin Heinz Humanities Educator of the Year. Gonterman now has a Japanese "Kamishibai" lesson published online with the Japan Society on their educator's website! Click here to view the lesson. Also, as a result of participation in the conference, Gonterman is currently establishing a new partnership with an international elementary school in Japan. Photo: Gonterman is sitting on the far right of the first table with educators from Japan and Pakistan. (2) Two LRSD Teachers Win Competitive Study Opportunity at the Truman Library Chris Gonterman, Physical Education Teacher at Hall High School, and Vicki Stroud Gonterman, International Studies Specialist at Gibbs International Magnet Elementary School, have both been selected as winners of the Summer Teachers Seminar entitled, "U.S. Presidents and the Middle East: Truman to Obama," offered by the Truman Library in Independence, Missouri this July. The two will attend the weeklong conference, along with teachers selected from across the United States, attend lectures, and utilize the Truman Library's primary source documents on Presidential Policy Making in the Middle East to create lesson plans. The competitive application process included a personal essay explaining the content and pedagogy that would be utilized in their classroom along with an application and resume. (3)Reading Quiz Bowl Results Results for Gibbs Magnet's First Reading Bowl! Gibbs International Magnet School has just concluded its first Reading Bowl of the year! Students in grades 3-5 had an assigned book over the summer. Upon their return to school in August, the children anticipated involvement in a quiz bowl competition around their book. The competition was conducted in each classroom. The winning team in each classroom faced off against the winning team in the opposing grade level homeroom! Homeroom winners were: Third Grade - Mrs. Jennifer White's students
4th Grade - Mrs. Julie Davis's students
and Fifth Grade - Ms. Jennifer Gillespie's students! Each student on the winning teams received a certificate with their team photo. A trophy is also displayed outside each classroom! These children exhibited great sportsmanship! They are looking forward to the next Reading Quiz Bowl at Gibbs! Pictured above are (1) fourth graders and (2) third grade students competing in the first-ever Gibbs Reading Quiz Bowl! (4) LRSD Launches One-to-One Laptop Initiative The Little Rock School District announced an exciting new 1 :1 (one-to-one) technology initiative Tuesday to be piloted at four elementary schools. The initiative will put laptops in the hands of 4-Sth grade students at Gibbs, Forest Park, Otter Creek and Roberts Elementary schools starting in January, 2014. (Gibbs featured in photo top row, center) LRSD is launching the initiative first to teachers, with an extensive Professional Development push, then to students and parents in a three-phase process. The three phases will occur over two years and include: Four schools - Phase One Eight-ten schools - Phase Two All elementary schools - Phase Three Students will be able to take the laptops home with them every day, providing them with a 24-7 learning opportunity. The devices will be used to prepare students for college and career in a digital world incorporating National Educational Technology Standards (NETS). These standards are used to provide the experiences students should routinely encounter as well as the skills and knowledge they need to acquire - a few are listed below. Creativity and Innovation Communication and Collaboration Research and Information fluency Critical Thinking
Problem-solving and Decision making
Digital Citizenship
and Technology Operations and Concepts "The laptops will help to better engage students in the learning process, increase academic achievement and help students to become independent learners," said LRSD Superintendent Dr. Dexter Suggs. "Providing the 1 :1 computing opportunity to our students sends a definitive message that access to technology can be transformative." LRSD Director of Instructional Technology Barbara Williams added, "The 1 :1 initiative is just what we need as we prepare our teachers and students with twenty-first century technology teaching and learning skills." The district will provide one bag and charging accessory for the laptop. The goal is to eventually replace textbooks with laptops. Parent information meetings will begin in January, 2014 for students who receive devices. (5) Twitter/ lrsd: Congratulations to Gibbs Head https://twitter.com/lrsd/status/403894029483380737 Nov 22, 2013 - Congratulations to Gibbs Head Custodian Carl Shumate who is celebrating 40 years at Gibbs! He started working at. .. http://fb.me/2xDcUKK2s. (6) Little Rock School District - Little Rock, AR - Public School I Facebook https://www.facebook.com/mylrsd?ref=stream&viewer_id=O ... 3 The Gibbs Mini United Nations is supporting this fundraiser as this year's Change for Peace for Victims of Typhoon Haiyan. (7) Little Rock School District - Little Rock, AR - Public School I Facebook https://www.facebook.com/mylrsd?rf=187111201326948 GIBBS MAGNET STUDENTS COMMEMORATE VETERAN'S DAY ... grades 3-5 at Gibbs International Magnet School made and assembled red poppy wreaths to commemorate Veteran's Day in French foreign language classes ... E. Gibbs is currently featured on the LRSD Access Channel with two programs: (1) Gibbs "9/11 Day of Service and Remembrance" which included First Lady of Arkansas, Ginger Beebe, reading to a Kindergarten class and many other service volunteers reading in grades K-3 (Filmed September 11) and ( continued) (2) Gibbs Third and Fourth Grades Musical Program "Music, Arts, and Play-The Gibbs Way" (Filmed October 7) 2. Community Involvement: (1) SEPTEMBER 27 - Gibbs fifth graders perform at Opening Ceremony of WorldFest annually for school and community relations (City of Little Rock and LR Racial and Cultural Diversity Commission). Photos to appear on LRRCDC Website. (2) Other community events such as with the Clinton Foundation, the Sister Cities Commission, Heifer International, etc. as requested during the year. 3. Weekly newsletter (every Wednesday) 1st Quarter - The newsletter is called El Mundo, Spanish for The World. 2nd Quarter-The newsletter is called Le Monde, French for The World. See separate attachments. 4. Special Days at School for Families ( 1) SEPTEMBER 6 - Grandparents Day Luncheon (2) OCTOBER 25 - Dads Day Luncheon (3) Moms Day Luncheon (May 9) (4) Coffee Cafe (monthly on a Friday) for parents and staff before school in media center September 13, October 4, November 8, December 6 5. Special Evenings at Gibbs: (1) AUGUST - New Student/Family Orientation (2) SEPTEMBER - Open House (3) MONTHLY - Scouting Nights (4) QUARTERLY -PTA Meetings SEPTEMBER 12 - 1st PT A Meeting NOVEMBER 14 - 2nd PTA Meeting (5) OCTOBER 22 - Family Math and Literacy Night (6) November 22 Family Movie Night (7) International Fest (May 2) (8) Science Fair Family Meeting (grades 3-5) (9) Musicals each year performed by students OCTOBER 7 - "The Arts, Music, and Play: The Gibbs Way" Musical by 3rd and 4th graders (two performances, 1 :00 and 6:00 p.m.) DECEMBER 16 - "Winter Fun and Games" Musical by 1st and 2nd graders (two performances, 1:00 and 6:00 p.m.) 6. Recruitment Invitations, Brochures, and CD's (1) We will send invitations to the parents of P4 (Pre-K) students in Early Childhood Schools to visit Gibbs during the two weeks prior to registration for the 2014-15 school year. (2) We will send invitations to our Partners in Education for prospective families to tour the school. (3) We will also alert our current Gibbs families and staff to talk with friends, church/work acquaintances, new neighbors to the LR area, etc. that have young children to invite them to Gibbs for a tour or a special evening event. 7. Magnet Schools Fair, Saturday, January 25, 2014 (ON-HOLD) (1) Information booth worked by teachers and parents with a tour signup sheet, brochures, and CD's to be given away (2) Foreign Language Performances by Gibbs students 8. Tours of the School (1) Scheduled Tours - International Studies Specialist gives scheduled tours of the school. (2) NOVEMBER 11-15 - "Check Us Out" Week- (including Check Us Out Days -November 12-14). We offer a week of tours guided by parent volunteers or the International Studies Specialist and distribute informational brochures to prospective families. (3) JANUARY 27-FEBRUARY 7 - Open Enrollment Period. We offer tours with parent volunteers or IS Specialist for that two week period and distribute CD's of our magnet program to prospective families. Compiled and submitted by Vicki Stroud Gonterman Magnet Review From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Betty Bradford (bradfordb@nlrsd.org] Friday, December 13, 2013 8:40 AM Magnet Review Fwd: Revised URGENT INFORMATION Desegregation Settlement Agreement Exhibit 1.pdf ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Micheal Stone <stonem@nlrsd.org> Date: Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:26 PM Subject: Revised URGENT INFORMATION Desegregation Settlement Agreement To: NLRSD Faculty <nlrsd-faculty@nlrsd.org> SCHOOL DESEGREGATION SETTLEMENT PENDING The Proposed Settlement. In November 2013, the parties of the class action lawsuit joined a new Proposed Settlement Agreement to release the State from its obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. Individual members of the class will not be (and have never been) awarded any money through the new Proposed Settlement Agreement. The key terms of this Proposed Settlement Agreement for the will affect magnet schools, m to m transfers, desegregation funding, and the legal transfer of students within the three districts in Pulaski County. 1) The State will continue to make desegregation payments to the NLR School District for four more years and no longer. 2) No new M to Mor Magnet School transfers will be permitted. 3) Students currently enrolled in M to M and Magnet programs may continue. 4) The Districts will continue to provide free transportation to existing M to Mor stipulation Magnet students for at least three years. 5) The LRSD and PCSSD have currently opted out of the State's School Choice law. Under the Proposed Settlement Agreement, PCSSD and LRSD will allow 30 legal transfer students to attend NLRSD yearly and NLRSD will allow 30 legal transfers to attend LRSD. During this five year settlement agreement, siblings of students attending NLRSD through legal transfer will be given first priority to legally transfer into the NLRSD. 6) Students currently enrolled in one of the Districts under the State's School Choice law may continue to attend until they move or graduate from high school. More Information Available. '54.n Individual Approach to a World ef Knowledge" December 4, 2013 Good Afternoon, Parents: We are required by law to provide you with a copy of the attached legal notice regarding the proposed desegregation settlement. In addition to this copy which has been sent home with your student, for your convenience, you will also find the legal notice posted the following ways: On the website: LRSD.org Linked to LRSD's Facebook page and Twitter accounts Pamela Srnith LRSD, Director of Communications 810 W. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 www.lrsd.org 501-447-1000 fax: 501-447-1001 Notice Of Proposed Settlement Of Class Action, Rights Of Class Members, And Fairness Hearing To Consider The Proposed Settlement TO: All African-American or black public-school-age children of Pulaski County, Arkansas, and their parents or guardians
and All certified and non-certified staff employees of the Little Rock School District, Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, and North Little Rock School District The Background. A class action lawsuit is pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas: Little Rock School District, et at: v. Pulaski Cpunty Special School District, No. 4:82-cv-866 DPM. This case is sometimes called the Little Rock or Pulaski County desegregation case. The parties to this lawsuit.include a group of individuals kriown as the Joshua Intervenors. The Court has designated these Intervenors to represent the Joshua Class - "all current, past and future LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD black students, their parents and next friends." The other parties to the case are the Little Rock School District, the Pulaski County Special School District, the North Little Rock School District, a group of certified and noncertified staff organizations and individuals known as the Knight Intervenors, and the State of Arkansas by the Arkansas Department of Education. The class action does not involve payment of any money to individuals. It deals only with how schools in Pulaski County, Arkansas, are operated. It is only for injunctive relief. Since 1990 a document called the 1989 Settlement Agreement has required certain actions by the State and the three Districts including two programs to affect the racial balance of students in schools in Pulaski County. One program, the Majority to Minority (or M to M) transfer program, allowed some students to attend a school outside of the district in which they live. A second program allowed students to attend one of six stipulation Magnet schools in the LRSD. The six stipulation Magnet schools are Booker Elementary, Carver Elementary, Gibbs Elementary, Williams Elementary, Horace Mann Middle School, and Parkview High School. Both programs provide free transportation to students. The 1989 Settlement Agreement also requires the State to take other actions, some in support of desegregation of the schools. The State's total payments to the three Districts are currently around $67 million each year. The ADE has asked the Court to immediately release it from all obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. The Joshua Intervenors and the Districts have argued to the Court that the ADE should not be released from its obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. The Proposed Settlement. In November 2013, the parties joined a new Proposed Settlement Agreement to release the State from its obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. Individual members of the class will not be (and have never been) awarded any money through the new Proposed Settlement Agreement. The key terms of this Proposed Settlement Agreement are: The State will continue to make desegregation payments to the Districts for four more years and no longer
The M to M program will not accept new applications this year, and applications for students living in NLRSD or PCS SD to transfer to the.six stipulation Magnet schools in LRSD will no longer be accepted
Students currently enrolled in the M to M program can continue in this program as long as their parent or guardian chooses (including through high school graduation)
Students living in NLRSD or PCSSD now enrolled in one of the six stipulation Magnet schools in the LRSD can continue in their school as long as their parent or guardian chooses (including through the highest grade in the school)
After three years the Districts will not be required to provide free transportation to M to Mor stipulation Magnet students who cross District lines, but the Districts may do so if they choose to
and ' All of the State's obligations in this case end once the last payment is made to the Districts under the Proposed Settlement Agreement. The six stipulation Magnet schools will continue to exist. The Proposed Settlement Agreement changes the rules for who can enrolfin these schools and the availability of transportation. The PCSSD will remain under Court supervision for a time and continue to pursue unitary status. The possible creation of a Jacksonville/North Pulaski area school district consistent with state law is authorized. The State will oppose the creation of any other school district from PCSSD's territory until PCSSD is declared fully unitary and released from Court supervision. The Proposed Settlement Agreement also provides for some attorney's fees: $250,000 each to LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD
$500,000 to the Joshua Intervenors
and $75,000 to the Knight Intervenors. If there is any objection to the attorney's fees for the Intervenors, then the Court will decide what fee is reasonable. More Information Available. Copies of the documents described above, and a longer summary of the Proposed Settlement Agreement, can be found on several websites. Look for Desegregation Case Proposed Settlement Materials. Go to: State of Arkansas (http://www.arkansas.gov) Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (http://www.ag.arkansas.gov/), Arkansas Department of Education (http://www.arkansased.org), Little Rock School District (http://www.lrsd.org), North Little Rock School District (http://nlrsd.org), and Pulaski County Special School District (http://www.pcssd.org). 2 Fairness Hearing and Objections. The Proposed Settlement Agreement will not be final until the United States District Court approves it. The Court has set a Fairness Hearing to hear evidence and objections of class members about the Proposed Settlement Agreement at 9:30 a.m., on January 13 and 14, 2014, at the Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse, Court Room 1-A, 500 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas. Members of the Joshua Class may participate in the Fairness Hearing throt.1:ghc ounsel or personally. Any objections that members of the class have to Proposed Settlement Agreement must be submitted in writing to the Court by December 23, 2013. If you want to participate in the Fairness _ Hearing you must say so in your written Objection. Objections not received by Dece1T1be2r3 , 2013, may not be considered. Failure to object in writing by the deadline may mean you cannot participate in the Fairness Hearing. Submit objections to this address: James W. McCormack, Clerk of Court United States District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Room A149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Attn: Desegregation Case - Proposed Settlement Agreement No Opt Outs. Members of the Joshua Class cannot opt out of the class. This means that all members of the class will be bound by the Proposed Settlement Agreement if it is approved by the Court. They will also be bound by any judgment issued by the Court. Questions. Members of the Joshua Class who have questions concerning the claims asserted in this litigation, the Proposed Settlement Agreement, or the Fairness Hearing, should direct their questions in writing to counsel for the Joshua Intervenors: John W. Walker, 1723 Broadway, Little Rock, AR 72206-1220, johnwalkeratty@aol.com Members of the Knight Intervenors who have questions concerning the claims asserted in this litigation, the Proposed Settlement Agreement, or the Fairness Hearing, should direct their questions in writing to counsel for the Knight Intervenors: Mark Burnette or Clayton Blackstock, Mitchell Blackstock Law Firm, 1010 West Third Street, Little Rock, AR 72201, mburnette@mitchellblackstock.com or cblackstock@mitchellblackstock.com Piease do not caii or write the Court, or the Cierk of the Court, for information or advice. 3 More information regarding the proposed settlement, including a copy of the Proposed Settlement Agreement, can be found on the NLR School District website: www.nlrsd.org Fairness Hearing and Objections. The Proposed Settlement Agreement will not be final until the U.S. District Court approves it at a Fairness Hearing on January 13 and 14, 2014. The Court will hear evidence and objections of class me~bers about the Proposed Settlement Agreement at 9:30 am on January 13 and 14, 2014 at the Richard Sheppard Arnold U.S. Courthouse, Court Room 1-A, 500 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas. Any objections members of the class have to the Proposed Settlement Agreement must be submitted in writing to the Court by December 23, 2013. If you want to participate in the Fairness Hearing you must say so in your written objection. Objections not received by December 23, 2013 may not be considered. Submit objections to this address: James W. McCormack, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Richard Sheppard Arnold U.S. Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Room A149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Attn: Desegregation Case - Proposed Settlement Agreement Micheal Stone. ED:-, b
ccuti\'e Director of Student and I:quit: Sen ices orth I ittlc Rock School District Of1ice (501) 771-8050 I a, (501) 771-8097 Ed11catio11i s for all, our charge i\ to gfre our best i11a ll we do for the rncceH <?(the children a11dfamilies ll'e sel"l'e! Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4949-1 Filed 11/27/13 Page 1 of 3 Notice Of Proposed Settlement Of Class Action, Rights Of Class Members, And Fairness Hearing To Consider The Proposed Settlement TO: All African-American or black public-school-age children of Pulaski County, Arkansas, and their parents or guardians
and All certified and non-certified staff employees of the Little Rock School District, Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, and North Little Rock School District The Background. A class action lawsuit is pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas: Little Rock School District, et al. v. Pulaski County Special School District, No. 4:82-cv-866 DPM. This case is sometimes called the Little Rock or Pulaski County desegregation case. The parties to this lawsuit include a group of individuals known as the Joshua Intervenors. The Court has designated these Intervenors to represent the Joshua Class - "all current, past and future LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD black students, their parents and next friends." The other parties to the case are the Little Rock School District, the Pulaski County Special School District, the North Little Rock School District, a group of certified and noncertified staff organizations and individuals known as the Knight Intervenors, and the State of Arkansas by the Arkansas Department of Education. The class action does not involve payment of any money to individuals. It deals only with how schools in Pulaski County, Arkansas, are operated. It is only for injunctive relief. Since J 990 a document called the 1989 Settlement Agreement has required certain actions by the State and the three Districts including two programs to affect the racial balance of students in schools in Pulaski County. One program, the Majority to Minority (or M to M) transfer program, allowed some students to attend a school outside of the district in which they live. A second program allowed students to attend one of six stipulation Magnet schools in the LRSD. The six stipulation Magnet schools are Booker Elementary, Carver Elementary, Gibbs Elementary, Williams Elementary, Horace Mann Middle School, and Parkview High School. Both programs provide free transportation to students. The 1989 Settlement Agreement also requires the State to take other actions, some in support of desegregation of the schools. The State's total payments to the three Districts are currently around $67 million each year. The ADE has asked the Court to immediately release it from all obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. The Joshua Intervenors and the Districts have argued to the Court that the ADE should not be released from its obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. The Proposed Settlement. In November 2013, the parties joined a new Proposed Settlement Agreement to release the State from its obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. Individual members of the class will not be (and have never been) awarded any money through the new Proposed Settlement Agreement. The key terms of this Proposed Settlement Agreement are: Exhibit 1 - ---- Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4949-1 Filed 11/27/13 Page 2 of 3 The State will continue to make desegregation payments to the Districts for four more years and no longer
The M to M program will not accept new applications this year, and applications for students living in NLRSD or PCSSD to transfer to the six stipulation Magnet schools in LRSD will no longer be accepted
Students currently enrolled in the M to M program can continue in this program as long as their parent or guardian chooses (including through high school graduation)
Students living in NLRSD or PCSSD now enrolled in one of the six stipulation Magnet schools in the LRSD can continue in their school as long as their parent or guardian chooses (including through the highest grade in the school)
After three years the Districts will not be required to provide free transportation to M to Mor stipulation Magnet students who cross District lines, but the Districts may do so if they choose to
and All of the State's obligations in this case end once the last payment is made to the Districts under the Proposed Settlement Agreement. The six stipulation Magnet schools will continue to exist. The Proposed Settlement Agreement changes the rules for who can enroll in these schools and the availability of transportation. The PCSSD will remain under Court supervision for a time and continue to pursue unitary status. The possible creation of a Jacksonville/North Pulaski area school district consistent with state law is authorized. The State will oppose the creation of any other school district from PCSSD's territory until PCSSD is declared fully unitary and released from Court supervision. The Proposed Settlement Agreement also provides for some attorney's fees: $250,000 each to LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD
$500,000 to the Joshua Intervenors
and $75,000 to the Knight Intervenors. If there is any objection to the attorney's fees for the Intervenors, then the Court will decide what fee is reasonable. More Information Available. Copies of the documents described above, and a longer summary of the Proposed Settlement Agreement, can be found on several websites. Look for Desegregation Case Proposed Settlement Materials. Go to: State of Arkansas (http://www.arkansas.gov) Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (http://www.ag.arkansas.gov/), Arkansas Department of Education (http://www.arkansased.org), Little Rock School District (http://www.lrsd.org), North Little Rock School District (http://nlrsd.org), and Pulaski County Special School District (http://www.pcssd.org). 2 Exhibit 1 , ' Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4949-1 Filed 11/27/13 Page 3 of 3 Fairness Hearing and Objections. The Proposed Settlement Agreement will not be final until the United States District Court approves it. The Court has set a Fairness Hearing to hear evidence and objections of class members about the Proposed Settlement Agreement at 9 :30 a.m., on January 13 and 14, 2014, at the Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse, Court Room 1-A, 500 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas. Members of the Joshua Class may participate in the Fairness Hearing through counsel or personally. Any objections that members of the class have to Proposed Settlement Agreement must be submitted in writing to the Court by December 23, 2013. If you want to participate in the Fairness Hearing you must say so in your written Objection. Objections not received by December 23, 2013, may not be considered. Failure to object in writing by the deadline may mean you cannot participate in the Fairness Hearing. Submit objections to this address: James W. McCormack, Clerk of Court United States District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Room A149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Attn: Desegregation Case - Proposed Settlement Agreement No Opt Outs. Members of the Joshua Class cannot opt out of the class. This means that all members of the class will be bound by the Proposed Settlement Agreement ifit is approved by the Court. They will also be bound by any judgment issued by the Court. Questions. Members of the Joshua Class who have questions concerning the claims asserted in this litigation, the Proposed Settlement Agreement, or the Fairness Hearing, should direct their questions in writing to counsel for the Joshua Intervenors: John W. Walker, 1723 Broadway, Little Rock, AR 72206-1220, johnwalkeratty@aol.com Members of the Knight Intervenors who have questions concerning the claims asserted in this litigation, the Proposed Settlement Agreement, or the Fairness Hearing, should direct their questions in writing to counsel for the Knight Intervenors: Mark Burnette or Clayton Blackstock, Mitchell Blackstock Law Firm, 1010 West Third Street, Little Rock, AR 72201, mburnette@mitchellblackstock.com or cblackstock@mitchellblackstock.com Please do not call or write the Court, or the Clerk of the Court, for information or advice. 3 J:x_hibit 1 PCSSD Home E':itafDf 1recmry Home News Families Get Involved Schools Staff Notice of Proposed Settlement Notice Of Proposed Settlement Of Class Action, Rights Of Class Members, And Fairness Hearing To Consider The Proposed Settlement TO: All African-American or black publlc-school-age children of Pulaskl County, Arkansas, and their parents or guardians
and All certified and non-certified staff employees of the Little Rock School District, Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, and North Little Rock School District Background A dass action lawsuit is pending ln the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas llttle Rock School District, et al. v. Pulaski County Special School District. et al., No. 4:82-cv-866 OPM The parties to this lawsuit are The Joshua Class - A group of individuals known as the Joshua lntervenors The Court has designated these lntervenors to represent a class ot au past, present and future AfricanAmerican or black publlc-school-age children of Pulaski County, Arkansas and their parents or guardians The Litue Rock School Oistrid The Pulaski County Spedal Sd1oo! Distnd The North LIIUe Rod< Sd1oo! DIstnd The Knight lntervenors A group of aH certified and non-certified staff employees of the UtUe Rock Sdlool District, Putaski County Special School Oistrid No 1, and North little Rock School Oistrid The State of Arkansas by the Ar1<ansas Department of Education No da1m for damages or payment of money to indiVidual members of the dass has ever been made in this case. U only deals with how sdlools are operated In Pulaski County, Arkansas This case only asked for 1nIundive rehef The dass was certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23{b)(2) This notice wall refer to the existing settlement agreements and consent deaees among the parties related to LitUe Rod< School District, et al. V. Putaski County Special School D1strid, et al, No 4 82-cv-1166 DPM and cases consohdated therein {UllS uugation) as the 1959 Settlement Agreement. The ADE has filed a Mabon for Release from 1989 Setuement Agreement in this hbgat,on. The AD E's motion asks the Court to immediately relieve the State from any and all obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. The Joshua lntervenors and the D,stncts have argued to the Court that the ADE should oot be released from its obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreemenl Summary of 1989 Settlement Agreement The 1989 Settlement Agreement requires the State to, among other things Provide part of the funding for six Magnet schools in Pulaski County Provide funding for majonty-to-minority student transfers, induding transportation costs, to Iha following Magnet schoo{s Gibbs, Booker, Carver, Parkview, Mann, and IMlliams Provide funchng for compensatory education payments to (LRSD), the North little Rock School Distnd (NLRSD), and the Pulaski County Special School Dostnd (PCSSD) (cotled1vely "the Oistrids). These payments for compensatory education programs ended in 1998 t..u-.!l ............... _,....,..,..,..1 ,...,..,...../_,..,....,..,...,...,,..,~ ,..,,..,..,...1,,...,...-...+.. Page I of 5 Tf:>dl Suppc,r1 Experianr.t': tho power cf pqbhc r:d,.1,..:i11on Our Leadership Departrnents .Top Headlines PCSSD teachers mcogn1zed as Amazing Educators PCSSO schools cc1~1bra1EeA ST Night Out The lat2 Major Franzen I,onortid by Jaeksonv,Ue High PCSSD scholars rewarded for !heir nard work EdL1calion Matten> Speaal education for pre-K cnildren Search J ...:::::, Orstnd Galandar I Studtnl l'lutnlion Ml?nu-s g Footoall se1,eduIe, Social Media II a Recent PCSSD News PCSS D sehools r<"'()pc.nT w ?Sday December 10 V\lmrers of Bus Su~tty Poster Contest anncun,:c.-<1 Summary of Bodrd Oierdt1ons. November 2013 PCSSO pr11paresf vr pos~b,hly cf severe eitom,s f.iPlp Mills High Sift th~ sleigh fO( area fos:c..,c. htdren 1 ')/1 t:,/')()11 PCSSD Home Refrain trom retaliating against the Olstnds because of this Litigation or the 1989 Settlement Agreemen~ and refra1n from enacting any legislation that has a substantial adverse impact on the ability of the o,stncts to desegregate Monitor compensatory education programs by the Districts Join LRSO If LRSO pelilIons Ille Court lo allow ,1 lo hold a millage electioo Research and list laws that impede desegregation and submit legislation to repeal such laws to the Arkansas General Assembly as soon as practicable, not knowingly promulgate or retain any regulations that impede desegregation, and modify or repeal any regulation that Is demonstrated to impede desegregatJon Remain committed to the prlnaples that there should be a remedIabon of the racial academic achievement disparities for Arlcansas students, that special education classes and gifted and talented dasses should not be racially identifiable, and that the ADE and the Districts should work cooperatively to promote the desegregation goals of the State and the Districts and to ensure educational excellence in the public schools In Pulaski County and throughout the State Develop and search for programs to remediate ach1evemenl disparities between black and white students Conduct periodic reviews of tests used In the State's testing program to determine if students' race, sex, or culture adversefy affect their test scores, and, If bias is found in any test, the test w,11 not be used unless modified to ehminate the bias Establish in-service programs to assist in providing training for the staffs ot desegregating school d1stncts Obtain from higher education sources information by race on new teacher graduates kl subject areas that the Districts Identify actual or foreseeable shortages of minority teachers and provide that information to the Districts, seek to increase the pool of minority teachers available to the Districts and through reauitment efforts, and develop annual profiles of teachers available by race, specialty, subject area, and area of certification Work with the Arkansas Department of Higher Education to reduce any racial disparity that may exist in the distribution of existing scholarships and to serure passage of legislation to financially assist minority students attendlng Arkansas colleges and umversilies who commit to become tead'lers in Arkansas, Including scholarships for freshmen and sophomores who are committed to pursuing a teacher-training program and Juniors and seniors who have been accepted in teacher education programs Develop and implement a plan to identrfy jobs and consultant positions w,thin the Department in which mmonlies are underrepresented and recruit and employ minority applicants for those positions so as to create a balanced, desegregated staff at all levels Develop criteria for site selection of new schools, maIor school expansion and school closings, require that a district applying to it for approval of new construction or maIor school expansion provide a desegregation Impact statement setting forth evidence that the proposed Improvements do not have a segregative effect, and refrain from recommending or approving the site of any school in any county contiguous to Pulaski County if the construction or expansion of the school at the requested location of such school will have a substantial negative Impact on any District's ability to desegregate A copy of the 1989 Settlement Agreement is available by dicking here. Summary of Proposed Settlement Agreement In November 2013, the parties agreed that the State should be released from its obligaUons under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. This summary will refer to this new agreement among the parties in November 2013 as the Proposed Settlement Agreement. The parts of the Proposed Settlement Agreement are summarized below. The key terms are: The Slate will continue to make desegregation payments to the Districts for four more years and no longer, The M to M program will not accept new applications this year, and applications for students living in NLRSD or PCSSD to transfer to the six stipulation Magnet schools in LRSO will no longer be accepted
Students rurrently enrolled in the M to M program can continue in this program as long as their parent or guardian chooses (induding through high school graduation)
Students living Jn NLRSD or PCSSD now enrolled in one of the six stipulation Magnet schools in the LRSD can continue in their school as long as their parent or guardian chooses (including through the highest grade in the school)
After three years the Districts will not be required to provide free transportation to M to M or stipulation Magnet students who cross Distnct lines, but the Districts may do so if they choose to
The PCSSD will remain under Court superviSion for a time and continue to pursue unitary status
The possible creation of a Jacksonville/North Pulaski area school distnct consistent with state law is authorized. The State will oppose the creation of any other school district from PCSSO's territory until PCSSD is dedared fully unitary and released from Court supervision
The Proposed Settlement Agreement also provides for some attorney's fees: $250,000 each to LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD
$500,000 to the Joshua lntervenors
and $75,000 to the Knight lntervenors. If there is any obJection to the attorney's fees for the lntervenors, then the Court will decide what fee is reasonable All of the State's obligations in this case end once the last payment is made to the Oistrids under the Proposed Settlement Agreement Page 2 of 5 1')/11':/')()11 PCSSDHome Because this litigation only involved Injunctive relief, no money will be paid to any individual members of the class. No claim of monetary damages was ever made in this litigation and no payment of any monetary damages will be available through the Proposed Settlement Agreement. Unitary Status: PCSSD will remain under Court supervision for a time and continue to pursue unitary status. The parties agree that the Proposed Settlement Agreement will not hinder PCSSD's unitary status efforts. Dismissal of Parties: The Court will release the State, LRSD and NLRSD from the case. Also, LRSO and the Joshua lntervenors will voluntarily dismiss with prejudice their appeal of the Court's prior decision on charter school issues. State's Payments Under the Proposed Settlement Agreement: Payments will continue as they always have for the 2013-14 school year. Beginning on July 1, 2014, however, the State wilt change how it pays desegregation funds to the Districts. For three years the State will pay the Districts the same amount it paid the Districts in the 2012-13 school year. The to.ta! amounts of the payments for each of the first three years will be: LRSD = $37,347,429
NLRSD = $7,642,338
PCSSD = $20,804,500. Each year this money will be divided into eleven equal installments. These payments will be made in the 2014-15 school year (Year 1)
the 2015-16 school year (Year 2): and the 2016-17 school year (Year 3). In Year 4 (the 2017-2018 school year), the State will make payments to the Districts in the same amount as the prior year. However, the Year 4 payment can only be used for academic facilities construction projects as defined in Arkansas Code Annotated 6-20-2502(2) (Rep!. 2013). If the Districts use the payments in Years 1-3 (2014-2017) for qualifying academic facilities construction projects, then they can certify those amounts to the ADE. The restriction on the use of the Year 4 payments will not apply to the extent that the Districts have certified to the ADE academic facilities construction project expenses incurred in Years 1-3. The payments made pursuant to the Proposed Settlement Agreement will not be considered in determining the State's share of financial participation in local academic facilities projects eligible for State financial participation in any Academic Facilities Partnership Program projects that the Districts may apply for during the term of the Proposed Settlement Agreement. M to M student transition: Currently, students enrolled in the M to M student transfer program are not counted in the Districts' regular enrollment for the purpose of calculating regular state funding. The Proposed Settlement Agreement provides a method for transitioning those students back to the District's regular student counts. Magnet student transition: The State normally pays regular state funding to a district In which a student is enrolled, not the district where the student lives. Under the stipulation Magnet program in this case, the State pays regular state funding to the District in which the Magnet student lives. The Proposed Settlement Agreement provides a method to transition regular State funding to the District where the student Is enrolled. In no event will the State have any obligation to disburse any funding under the Proposed Settlement Agreement except as described herein. Under the Proposed Settlement Agreemenl the Slate will pay attorney's fees to the parties. As allowed by Ad 395 of 2007, the State will pay LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSO $250,000 for reimbursement of legal fees within ninety days of the Proposed Settlement Agreement being approved by the Court. The State will also pay the Joshua tntervenors $500,000 and the Knight lntervenors $75,000 unless contested, in which event the Court may award a reasonable fee unless otherwise agreed upon. The State holds title to a number of buses used by the Districts for the Magnet and M to M student transfer programs. 1/Vithinn inety days of the Proposed Settlement Agreement being approved by the Court, the State will transfer title to buses used for Magnet and M to M transportation to the respective operating District of each respective bus. State's Obllgatlons to Tennlnate: The Proposed Settlement Agreement immediately ends the State's obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement and this litigation. When the last payment is made under the Proposed Settlement Agreement, the State's obligations under the Proposed Settlement Agreement and in the litigation end. After the Effective Date of the Proposed Settlement Agreement the only jurisdiction the Court would have over the Slate would be in the event that the Slate fails to pay any amount due under the Proposed Settlement Agreement. The parties will support the Court's approval of the Proposed Settlement Agreement, the entry of a Consent Judgment consistent with the Proposed Settlement Agreement, and the entry of any and all orders necessary to effectuate the Proposed Settlement Agreement. Jacksonville/North Putaski Area School District The Proposed Settlement Agreement authorizes the possible creation of a Jacksonville/North Pulaski area school district consistent with state law. It also provides that the State will oppose the creation of any other school districts from PCSSO's territory until PCSSD is dedared fully unitary and is released from Court supervision. 1-~-. ,, ... ___ .., _ ,..,..,_,l ,.._,...., ______ ,..,.,...,...,:I ",,...-4-+f,. .._,..,.......,+ Page 3 of 5 1 'J/1 hnn11 PCSSDHome School District Obllgations: Students already enrolled in the Magnet or M to M program as of the effective date of the Proposed Settlement Agreement may remain in their assigned schools and assigned District. No new applications will be accepted under lhe Magnet or M to M Stipulations after the effective date of the Proposed Settlement Agreement, but students may enroll in the Magnet schools as legal transfers as set out in another part of the Proposed Settlement Agreement. Each District will be required to continue providing transportation to remaining Magnet or M to M students residing in their District for three years, or up to and through the 201617 school year. After that the Districts may, but are not required to, provide transportation to any remaining M to M or Magnet transfer students in the 2017-18 school year or thereafter. The LRSD and the PCSSD have currently opted out of the State's school choice law. Under the Proposed Settlement Agreement, PCSSD wilt allow legal transfers of up to 30 students to LRSD and up to 30 students to NLRSO each year for five years, LRSD and NLRSD will allow legal transfers each to the other of up to 30 students each year for five years. During this time, siblings of transferred students will be given first priority. After the end of the five years, student transfers among the Districts will be governed by State law. The Proposed Settlement Agreement also releases the parties' obligations to each other. The 1989 Settlement Agreement contained a somewhat complicated provision known as the "Magnet pooling agreement. It dealt with payment of funds for Magnet students between LRSD and PCSSD. The Proposed Settlement Agreement releases this obligation. The PCSSD will remain under Court supervision for a time and continue to pursue unitary status. A copy of the Proposed Settlement Agreement is available here. A copy of the 1989 Settlement Agreement is available here. Fairness Hearing The Proposed Settlement Agreement will not be final until the United States District Court approves it. The Court has set a Fairness Hearing to hear evidence and objections of dass members about the Proposed Settlement Agreement at 9:30 a.m., on January 13 and 14, 2014, at the Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse, Court Room 1-A, 500 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas. Members of the Joshua Class may participate in the Fairness Hearing through counsel or personally. Any objections that members of the dass have to the Proposed Settlement Agreement must be submitted in writing to the Court by December 23, 2013. If you want to participate in the Fairness Hearing you must say so ln your written Objection. Objections not received by December 23, 2013, may not be considered. Failure to object in writing by the deadline may mean you cannot participate in the Fairness Hearing. Submit objections to this address: James W. McCormack, Clerk of Court United States District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Room A 149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Attn: Desegregation Case - Proposed Settlement Agreement Rights of Class Members No Opt Outs: Members of the Joshua Class cannot opt out of the dass. This means that arr members of the class will be bound by the Proposed Settlement Agreement if ii is approved by the Court. They will also be bound by any judgment issued by the Court. Questions: Members of the Joshua Class who have questions concerning the claims asserted in this litigation, the Proposed Settlement Agreement, or the Fairness Hearing, should direct their questions in writing to counsel for the Joshua lntervenors: John W. Walker, 1723 Broadway, Little Rock, AR 72206- 1220. johnwa!keratty@aoJ.com Members of the Knight lntervenors who have questions concerning the daims asserted in this litigation, the Proposed Settlement Agreement, or the Fairness Hearing, should direct their questions in writing to counsel for the Knight lnlervenors: Mark Burnette or Clayton Blackstock, Mitchell Blackstock Law Firm, 101 0 West Third Street, Little Rock, AR 72201, mburnette@mitchellblackstock.r..om or cblackstock@mi!chelfblackstock.com Please do not call or write the Court, or the clerk of the court, for lnfonnation or advice. 1-u-. //TT_T....,.TY _,...,..,,..,,..l ,..,... ..r.r l .......,.... ...,.,.,..,.,..,,...,.,l. .,,...,ul,..,...,_.,....... .+. Page 4 of 5 1 'l/1 t:./'l(\1 '.l ,.PCSSDHome Contact Us We welcome your feedback and questions. Please do not use this fom1 lo report tech support issues induding TAC and HAC - or to apply for careers with PCSSO. For tech support, please go tlfil!!. To apply for careers, go here Name: Email Address
Subject Message: lil, i.1! c:}r.111 ~ 1li:- t t.c~-:fr::.-:1cJii.n'. :t ]Ue~f.l'.'ll-~. Captclla: xfour=16 httn-1/ww-w nl'c:c:rl nro/nrrmnc:Prl-<:PttlPrnPnt Page 5 of 5 Staff Links Parent Links P.r.adc,m,cA ccountab111tyS erver Webma,1 Login AESOP Login eSd10ol Plus login eSr.hoolT eacherA cc."?~C$ onter Stale Required lnformalion SEAS Access fer Teachers ESC W<>r1S<sh Oebox Pulaski County Special School District 925 East Dixon Road Lottie Rock, AR 72206 ?013 Par<>ntal ln-.iolvr.mc-,nl Survey Adult l:Cucatioll C~nler-GED Apply fvr a car~i::r w,tn PCSSD -------~ Horne Aoc"'.'ss Centrr MyP aymonts Plus PCSSD Libraries Orulne Report susp1cion1o:fo i llegal acriv1ly SafePuptl Log,n Conned Vv'ilh kids Vl.'eOSourr..a Or Jerry Guess, Superintendent 501 234 2000 1 ")/1 h/")f\1 '.l
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.

<dcterms_creator>Arkansas. Department of Education</dcterms_creator>